ALLEGED CONFLICT OF INTEREST BY INVESTMENT ADVISER AND HIS COMPANY

FROM: U.S.  SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., May 30, 2012 – The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged a Phoenix-based investment adviser and his firm for recommending investments without telling clients about his personal stake and exploiting a client who was buying an ownership share in the firm.

The SEC’s Enforcement Division alleges that Walter J. Clarke advised clients at Oxford Investment Partners LLC to invest in two businesses without disclosing the conflicts of interest that he co-owned one of them and had financial ties to the owners of the other. Both investments later failed. And when Clarke’s own financial problems prompted him to sell a stake in Oxford to a client, he fraudulently inflated the value of his firm by at least $1.5 million to make the client overpay by at least $112,000.

“Investment advisers have a fiduciary duty to be forthcoming with their clients and act in their best interests,” said Marshall S. Sprung, Deputy Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit. “Clarke breached that duty by deliberately overvaluing the firm and staying mum on his personal ties to the recommended investments.”

According to the SEC’s order instituting administrative proceedings against Clarke and Oxford, Clarke convinced three clients in late 2007 and early 2008 to fund more than $300,000 in loans originated by Cornerstone Funding Group, a company co-owned by Clarke. However, the clients were never told that Clarke was a co-owner and would personally profit from successfully originated loans. Within months of the loans being funded, the underlying borrowers defaulted, causing the clients to lose their investments. In November 2008, Clarke convinced four clients to invest approximately $40,000 in HotStix, a privately-held company. The clients were not informed that the owners of HotStix were also co-owners and paid consultants of Oxford. Shortly after the clients made these investments, HotStix sought bankruptcy protection and the clients lost their money.

The SEC’s investigation further found that amid financial woes, Clarke sold a client 7.5 percent of his ownership interest in Oxford in March 2008. The client paid $750,000 based on Clarke’s valuation of Oxford at $10 million. However, Clarke used several ploys to fraudulently inflate Oxford’s value. First, Clarke applied an excessive and baseless multiple to Oxford’s 2007 annual revenue. Second, Clarke calculated Oxford’s 2007 revenue by quadrupling Oxford’s revenue in the fourth quarter of 2007 – its most profitable quarter that year – and ignoring Oxford’s lower revenue in the previous three quarters. Third, Clarke added a baseless $1 million “premium” to Oxford’s valuation.

According to the SEC’s order, Oxford and Clarke willfully violated Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder.

The SEC’s investigation was conducted by Paris A. Wynn and Mr. Sprung, who work in the Los Angeles Regional Office and are members of the Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit. Securities compliance examiner Ryan Hinson conducted the related examination under the supervision of Daniel C. Jung. The SEC’s litigation will be led by Mr. Wynn and David Van Havermaat.

ST. JUDE MEDICAL INC. PAYS $3.65 MILLION FOR ALLEGEDLY INFLATING CARDIAC DEVICE PRICES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Minnesota-based St. Jude Medical Pays U.S. $3.65 Million to Settle Claims That It Overcharged for Implantable Cardiac Devices St. Jude Medical Inc. has agreed to pay the United States $3.65 million to resolve civil allegations under the False Claims Act that the company inflated the cost of replacement pacemakers and defibrillators purchased by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, the Justice Department announced today. St. Paul, Minn.-based St. Jude Medical develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular and implantable neurostimulation medical devices.
         
The settlement resolves allegations that St. Jude actively marketed its pacemakers and defibrillators by touting the generous credits available should a device need to be replaced while covered under warranty.   At the same time, St. Jude allegedly knew that it failed to grant appropriate credits to the purchasers of devices in a large number of cases where a product was replaced while still under warranty.   As a result, the United States contended that St. Jude submitted invoices to Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals and Department of Defense military treatment facilities that overstated the cost for replacement pacemakers or defibrillators.
“As medical device use becomes more prevalent, it is essential that device manufactures provide federal health care programs with the warranty discounts they are entitled to receive,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division.   “If medical device manufacturers are actively concealing warranty credits from the government, the department will use all the tools at its disposal to hold them accountable.”

“Like any other customer, the government is entitled to get what it paid for,” said Carmen M. Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.   “Where a vendor warrants that its products will last a certain amount of time and then does not honor warranty claims when the products fail early, actions like this are appropriate.”
The civil settlement resolves allegations initially brought by two whistleblowers in federal court in the District of Massachusetts under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow for private citizens to bring civil actions on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery.   As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblowers will receive $730,000 from the settlement amount.

 “The Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General continues with its partners at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and other federal investigative agencies to combat fraud, waste, and abuse within the health care industry,” said Jeffrey G. Hughes, Special Agent in Charge, Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General.  “This civil settlement will return funds to VA to benefit our nation’s veterans.”

“The Defense Criminal Investigative Service is committed to working with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General, to ensure that taxpayer dollars are properly spent and that the health care needs of our military members and their families are met,” said Edward Bradley, Special Agent-in-Charge, Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Northeast Field Office.   “Today’s settlement demonstrates the importance of this collaborative effort to hold companies accountable when they fail to honor warranty discounts to which the U.S. Department of Defense is entitled.”

The settlement was the result of an investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts, the Justice Department’s Civil Division, and the Offices of Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs.   The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

FUTURES TRADING COMPANY GETS JUDGED AS BEING A PONZI SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
May 29, 2012
Securities and Exchange Commission v. New Futures Trading International Corporation and Henry Roche (United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, Civil Action No. 11-CV-532-JL, Complaint Filed November 16, 2011)
Court Enters Final Judgments Against New Hampshire Futures Day-Trading Business and Canadian Resident In Ponzi Scheme Case

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that, on May 24, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire entered final judgments by default against New Futures Trading International Corporation (“New Futures”), a New Hampshire business and Henry Roche, a Canadian resident who directed New Futures, in a Ponzi scheme action the Commission filed in November 2011.  Among other things, the court ordered the parties to pay a total of over $2.8 million.

In its complaint, filed on November 16, 2011, the Commission alleged that Roche, through New Futures, had been engaged in an ongoing unregistered offering of securities in the United States through operations in New Hampshire and Ontario, Canada. The Commission alleged that, since December 2010, Roche had raised over $1.3 million from at least 14 investors in nine states through the offer and sale of high yield promissory notes purportedly yielding either 5-10% per month, or a 200% return within 14 months.

According to the Commission’s complaint, Roche represented to some investors that funds supplied would be invested in bonds, Treasury notes and/or 10-year Treasury note futures contracts, and to others that the funds would be invested directly in New Futures, purportedly an on-line futures day-trading training business Roche was operating from Canada. The complaint alleged that, instead of using the funds for either purpose, Roche used approximately $937,000 provided by New Futures investors to make Ponzi “interest” payments to investors in prior Roche-controlled entities.  According to the Commission’s complaint, Roche also misappropriated at least another $359,000 to support his lifestyle, to operate a horse breeding venture, and to buy horses.  At the time the action was originally filed by the Commission, the court issued a temporary restraining order (later converted to a preliminary injunction) that, among other things, froze the assets of New Futures and Roche and prohibited them from continuing to solicit or accept investor funds.

The court, acting on the Commission’s motion for default judgments, entered final judgments: (1) imposing permanent injunctions against both New Futures and Roche enjoining them from future violations of Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; (2) ordering them each to pay disgorgement of their ill-gotten gains in the amount of $1,242,972 plus prejudgment interest of $40,917.47; and (3) ordering Roche to pay a monetary penalty in the amount of $150,000 and New Futures to pay a monetary penalty in the amount of $150,000.

TWO COMPANIES TO PAY $1 MILLION FOR SPILLS IN THREE STATES

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Mid-America Pipeline Company and Enterprise Products Operating to Pay $1 Million for Spills in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska

WASHINGTON – Mid-America Pipeline Company LLC (MAPCO), and Enterprise Products Operating LLC, of Houston, have agreed to pay a civil penalty of more than $1 million to the United States to settle violations of the federal Clean Water Act related to three natural gasoline pipeline spills in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska.

As part of a consent decree lodged today in U.S. District Court in Omaha, Neb., and in addition to paying the $1,042,000 civil penalty, the companies have agreed to undertake various measures aimed at reducing external threats to their pipeline, enhance their reporting of spills, and spend at least $200,000 to identify and prevent external threats to the pipeline involved in the spills.

MAPCO owns and Enterprise operates the 2,769-mile West Red Pipeline, which transports mixed natural gasoline products between Conway, Kan., and Pine Bend, Minn. The settlement resolves Clean Water Act violations related to three spills that occurred along the pipeline:

·      A March 29, 2007, rupture near Yutan, Neb., which caused the discharge of approximately 1,669 barrels of natural gasoline directly into an unnamed ditch and Otoe Creek.
·      An April 23, 2010, rupture near Niles, Kan., which caused the discharge of approximately 1,760 barrels of natural gasoline directly into an unnamed ditch, Cole Creek, Buckeye Creek and the Solomon River.
·      An Aug. 13, 2011, rupture near Onawa, Iowa, which caused the discharge of approximately 818 barrels of natural gasoline directly into the Missouri River.

“Pipeline ruptures and resulting spills can cause significant harm to the environment, so it is essential that pipeline owners and operators abide by federal laws intended to protect our land and waters,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice.  “This agreement will put into place important measures to prevent future spills and identify potential safety threats along MAPCO’s West Red Pipeline.”

“More than 20,000 miles of pipeline, carrying oil and petroleum products, cross the states of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska in EPA’s Region 7,” said Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrator Karl Brooks. “A frequent cause of pipeline breaks is the action of third parties during farming and excavation. This settlement requires the defendants to honor a schedule of pipeline inspections on the ground and from the air, and reach out to local agencies, contractors and excavators to make sure they are more fully aware of pipeline locations and depths.”

“This settlement requires proactive vigilance to ensure that our soil and waterways are protected from contaminants,” said Deborah R. Gilg, U.S. Attorney for the District of Nebraska.  “The agreement will result in safer pipeline operations and that will be good for Nebraska’s environment.”

In addition to the proactive inspections and outreach efforts, the settlement also requires MAPCO and Enterprise to spend $200,000 to relocate, cover, lower or replace pipeline segments; install new remote shutoff valves; install new physical protections such as fences or concrete barriers; and install other new equipment, structures or systems to prevent spills from reaching navigable waters.

TWO FIRMS AND OWNER CHARGED BY SEC WITH MISHANDLING INVESTOR FUNDS

FROM:  U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C., May 25, 2012 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced charges against a New York-based fund manager and his two firms for luring investors into a trading program that would purportedly maximize their profits but instead spent their money in unauthorized ways.

The SEC alleges that since at least November 2011, Jason J. Konior and his firms raised approximately $11 million by selling investors limited partnership interests in Absolute Fund LP, an investment vehicle that Konior claimed had $220 million in trading capital. Konior and his firms falsely claimed that Absolute Fund would allocate millions of dollars in matching investment funds, place the combined funds in brokerage accounts through which investors could trade securities, and operate a “first loss” trading program that would allow investors to dramatically increase their potential profits.

However, the SEC alleges that instead of using investor funds for trading purposes, Konior and his firms Absolute Fund Advisors (AFA) and Absolute Fund Management (AFM) siphoned off approximately $2 million of the proceeds to pay redemptions from earlier investors and to pay their personal and business expenses.

The SEC obtained an asset freeze against Konior and his companies late yesterday in federal court in Manhattan.

“Konior falsely portrayed Absolute Fund as a legitimate investment vehicle designed to maximize investors’ access to trading capital in order to grow their hedge fund businesses,” said Bruce Karpati, Co-Chief of the SEC Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit. “In reality, Konior’s operation became a way for Konior to funnel cash to his firms and himself for unauthorized purposes.”

According to the SEC’s complaint, Konior falsely represented to several investors that upon receipt of their investments, Absolute Fund would:
Allocate capital of up to nine times the amount of the investor’s capital contribution.

Place the combined funds in a sub-account at a broker-dealer through which the investor could trade securities.

Allocate any trading losses first to the investor’s contribution amount, and then any trading profits would be shared between Absolute Fund and the investor.

The SEC alleges that Absolute Fund did not actually operate the first loss trading program as promised for these investors. Absolute Fund also did not provide these investors with any matching funds or satisfy investor demands for returns of their capital contribution.

The SEC’s complaint charges Konior, AFA, and AFM with violating the antifraud provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and seeks, among other things, permanent injunctive relief, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and financial penalties. Without admitting or denying the allegations in the SEC's complaint, Konior, AFA, and AFM have consented to the entry of an order freezing their assets, imposing a preliminary injunction against further violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and providing other relief. The Honorable Judge Louis L. Stanton issued the court order granting such relief.

The SEC’s investigation, which is continuing, is being conducted by Catherine Lifeso, Lara Mehraban, Kerri Palen, and Ken C. Joseph of the New York Regional Office. Ms. Lifeso, Ms. Mehraban, and Mr. Joseph are members of the Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit. Aaron Arnzen is leading the SEC’s litigation.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SAYS COMPANY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST U.S. CITIZENS

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Justice Department Files Lawsuit Against New Jersey Information Technology Company for Retaliation
The Justice Department filed a lawsuit today against Whiz International LLC, an information technology staffing company in Jersey City, N.J., regarding allegations that the company violated the anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it terminated an employee in retaliation for expressing opposition to Whiz’s alleged preference for foreign nationals with temporary work visas.

The complaint alleges that the company directed an employee that served as a receptionist and a recruiter, to prefer certain noncitizens in its recruitment efforts and then terminated the employee when she expressed discomfort with excluding U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents from consideration. The anti-discrimination provision prohibits employers from retaliating against workers who oppose a practice that is illegal under the statute or who attempt to assert rights under the statute.

“Employers cannot punish employees who try to do the right thing and take reasonable measures to shed light on a practice they believe may be discriminatory,” said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. “Employers must ensure that their practices conform to the anti-discrimination provision of the INA, and retaliation will not be tolerated.”

The complaint seeks a court order prohibiting future discrimination by the respondent, monetary damages to the employee, as well as civil penalties.

The Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) is responsible for enforcing the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA, which protect U.S. citizens and certain work-authorized individuals from citizenship status discrimination.  The INA also protects work-authorized individuals from national origin discrimination, over-documentation in the employment eligibility verification process and retaliation.

WASHINGTON D.C. RESIDENT AND HER COMPANY CHARGED WITH OPERATING FRAUDULENT FOREX SCHEME

FROM:  U.S. COMMODITY AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
CFTC Charges Washington, DC, Resident Marina Bühler-Miko and Her Company, Coventry Asset Managers, LLC, with Operating Fraudulent Forex Scheme

Washington, DC - The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today announced the filing of a civil enforcement action in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against defendants Marina Bühler-Miko(Bühler-Miko) and her company, Coventry Asset Managers, LLC (Coventry), both of Washington, DC.  The CFTC complaint charges that Bühler-Miko and Coventry fraudulently solicited members of the general public to trade off-exchange foreign currency (forex) contracts on a leveraged or margined basis through a pooled investment vehicle, the Coventry Eire Forex Fund (Coventry Eire).  Neither defendant has ever been registered with the CFTC.

The complaint, filed on May 16, 2012, alleges that from at least June 18, 2008, through April 2011, Bühler-Miko and Coventry defrauded customers of at least $300,000 through their scheme.

In soliciting actual and prospective customers, the defendants allegedly made misrepresentations of material facts, including (1) guaranteeing customer profits of six percent quarterly, plus a bonus payment at the end of the 13-month “Asset Management Agreement” by trading forex in Coventry Eire, and (2) downplaying the risk of entering into leveraged forex transactions.

Bühler-Miko, who had no trading experience, admitted in sworn testimony that no customers received the promised quarterly returns or bonus payments and that she ultimately advised each customer that they had lost nearly all of their principal trading forex contracts through Coventry Eire, according to the complaint.

In its continuing litigation, the CFTC seeks disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, restitution to defrauded customers, civil monetary penalties, permanent trading and registration bans, and permanent injunctions against further violations of the Commodity Exchange Act.
CFTC Division of Enforcement staff responsible for this action are Timothy J. Mulreany, Tracey Wingate, Michael Amakor, Paul Hayeck, and Joan Manley.